Thank you for a balanced take on the result of the referendum in Ireland. Having lived for many years in Germany I know what it is like to live in a country where civil rights are widely promised but are equally widely withheld. We have not seen nor are we likely to see German or French paratroopers on our streets in Ireland. With the inevitable move towards non jury courts and summary ex judicial convictions as in Germany and France, the juristocracy will seek to enforce a new order without primitive jackboots. Removing common law safeguards will have the same effect. The democratic mask of Brussels has been seen to have slipped as a result of this referendum. They will not be able to make this breach good. Built on such a foundation, rather sooner than later, this edifice will collapse.

I am very concerned that the new foreign policy High Rep will be a disaster. It's a real contradiction to have a commissioner taking orders from the Council. How can he maintain his loyalty to collegial secrecy in the Commission, when he is answerable to and dependent upon the members of the GAERC -who have multiple agendas outside of the field of foreign relations. It seems like a recipe for trouble when the Council has one of the Commissioners so closely under their thumbs, and he (or his representatives) will be sitting at every College meeting, possibly acting as a trojan horse for the Member States.

I am growing tired with the attitude of this house. I read Economist.com about every two days and every single article ends on a negative note.
"XYZ is a good idea, but it might have terrible consequences."
"The world is going to hell and nobody is willing to do a thing."
"The Lisbon Treaty is highly flawed and will not be replaced for a long time."
Can you please quit whining and look on the good intentions that made this treaty possible? Would you prefer negotiation with 7.62" bullets more? No wonder classical journalism is going down the toilet when reading "quality" articles makes the average reader feel suicidal.

"Non transparent, bureaucratic,detached" - sounds like any "democratic" government to me.

If governments put all proposed legislation to the people I expect little or none would be passed.

It says much that a small country like Ireland was at least respected and LISTENED to by our fellow Europeans. Now that's democracy, even if much fine tuning is still needed. We remember worse times!!.

The true of meaning of the Lisbon text, though much more explicit in the course of this campaign than the previous, still failed to be the decisive factor in many peoples decision, IN MY OPINION. We saw very little of the Irish politicians in this campaign - a few photos, the odd speech, nothing major.

Non-politicians were the focal point. There was a televised debate in Ireland between the head of Ryanair, Michael O'Leary (YES) and the leader of Libertas (NO). Both of these gentlemen clearly have personal agendas and my decision and those of many of my friends and family was based simply on which of the two we liked more!

I voted YES simply (and one may argue irrationally but I don't believe so) because the NO side was led by an arrogant, hypocritical multi-millonaire who insulted a whole category of voters (under 25s) by calling them 'children' and refusing to debate their issues. O'Leary came straight out and said he was supporting the government's YES campaign for personal gain (he is trying to convince the gov to sell him it's stake in the national airline, Aer Lingus, as he would then be majority shareholder and effectively hold a monopomy in Irish aviation). Finally, a bit of TRUTH in politics. Everyones in it for themselves and Lisbon won't change that!

It would be well to remember why the European commission was created with the powers it has. The commission is the only body to propose legislation that benefits all of Europe to exclude partisan legislation from derailing the European project.

It does so with a supremely educated civil service that is probably the smallest in the world for such a large population.

I anticipate the usual English tirade of abuse about the EU to this (overlong) article.

FACT : Faults and all European unity is the best way forward in an ever changing world. It certainly beats WW1 and WW2 in addressing our differences.

FACT : It will take time, but overall it's already working very well - like it or not.

FACT : If London was the EU capital, most English objections would evaporate overnight.

Finally, please no banging on about "freedom", (I saw no German or French paratroops on Irish streets) apart from xenophobia, would someone explain to me what problem there is in embracing and contributing your part to Europe with its wonderful culture and heritage, not to mention standard of living.

The Lisbon Treaty is seen here as a chance for more transparency and, maybe, more democracy. What Europeans do with this "chance" lies in their own hands now . . . much more than ever before in Europe's history. The path whereto it finally will lead us is labyrinthine and generally still unknown. But weren’t we once the greatest sailors and explorers on earth?

Decision making in Brussels will inevitably need to be more transparent - not over night but in the long run, since MEPs will gradually be sent with clearer mandates and be (hopefully) better watched in their Strasbourg-performance too.

If we like the EU or not - it exists and influences us as long as we live in its sphere of daily reach and jurisdiction. It is better then if we, the citizens, have in reverse some 'influence' too, than just being impacted by 'distant' decisions that still intrude our all lives.
And: If this experiment should really become “unbearable” for us citizens, there is now a warranted “exit clause” - I’ve heard, lol.

One aspect becomes quite obvious when reading this article: This magazine seems to be ‘hellish’ afraid of this “daring” . . . to give more democracy to Europe’s citizens. I was wondering why, since the Economist always pretends to be a “defender of democracy”. Is it maybe that the Economist only defends a “kind of democracy” that it controls through its clientele? - Or is it because this publication never really trusted those ‘plebeians’ from the continent.

The comradery with the "Lords" of London’s homonymous House is probably much more rewarding and snugly?

Well it looks like we are going to have a Lisbon treaty, after all, or to give it it's full title

" THE TREATY OF LISBON AMENDING THE TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION AND THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY "

So at least we all know what to call it from now on, and so will every second level student, if it comes up in their final exam.

Now imagine for a moment that you ARE a second level student, and in your final exam, you have to write an essay on " What it means to be European and how the new treaty will affect your civil liberties, v Your previously held civil liberties, under the Irish Constitution.

Not an unreasonable question for someone doing their finals, but just what percentage of 17 year old students do you think, would understand the complexities of the 238 page document, that so far,law professors and and acedemics, have been unable to agree on, and also very well educated politicians throughout the 27 member countries have been in disagreement since it's inception.

I write this piece, not because I'm against it, but because I believe that every citizen should be capable of reading and understanding a document on which their future's will depend.

I believe this document could and should have been written in form, which could be taught in schools, and that every puple would have an understanding of their civil rights, and civil liberties, without needing a degree in international law, to do so.

I mention this because the European Court of Justice, now has precedence over the Irish Supreme Court, which hitherto decided if The Irish Constitution had been violated or not.

So does this make the Irish Constitution Redundant, since we cannot challenge it here, in our own Supreme Court any more, without having the ruling overturned, by the European Court of Justice.

WE all know that civil rights and civil liberties, are put on the back burner from time to time,and indeed sometimes we can be downright deprived of them and it's important to know how and where, to make a constitunal challenge, if either right is violated.